Lawyer admits calling PCGG chief, clears FG

MANILA, Philippines – A lawyer of First Gentleman Mike Arroyo admitted calling the head of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) for help regarding the Government Service Insurance System’s legal battle with the Manila Electric Co. but denied he did so on orders of the President’s husband.

“The First Gentleman has nothing to do with this. FG doesn’t interfere in governance,” lawyer Jesus Santos told ABS-CBN News Channel.

“How can they even insinuate that the First Gentleman had something to do with the conflict? I’m only one of the many lawyers of the First Gentleman. It’s not a valid conclusion,” Santos said.

“I believe there’s an effort to discredit the Sabios to divert attention away from the real issue, which is the abuses of Meralco arising from its pass-on charges and questionable deals with Lopez companies,” he said in a statement, referring to PCGG chief Camilo Sabio and his brother, Court of Appeals (CA) Justice Jose Sabio.

Santos admitted that he called up the PCGG chief, but claimed it was only to seek legal advice from “a long-time friend.”

Santos said he was acting as a member of the GSIS board when he called up Sabio and that he did not consider the PCGG chief’s being a brother of a CA justice.

“I only told Chairman Sabio if anything legal can be done to give justice to long-suffering Meralco customers being saddled by Meralco with exorbitant power rates,” Santos added.

PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio, for his part, said he was protecting the interest of the “long suffering public” when he made the telephone appeal to his brother – Court of Appeals Associate Justice Jose Sabio – to help the GSIS.

The PCGG chair justified his controversial phone conversation with his brother before a Supreme Court panel investigating allegations of bribery at the CA.

Sabio earlier admitted contacting his brother after learning from Santos that the CA justice was already with the 9th Division to which the GSIS-Meralco case had been assigned.

“I am an official of the government. My brother, Justice Jose L. Sabio Jr., is also an official of the government. The basic mandate of the government pursuant to the supreme will of the Philippine Constitution is to protect the poor, the disadvantaged, the under-privileged, the underdog and the oppressed in our society,” Sabio told the SC panel composed of retired justices Romeo Callejo, Flerida Ruth Romero and Carolina Griño-Aquino.

“Social justice is the heart and soul of our Constitution. Having been conceived and promulgated in a different social context, our Constitution is different from the US government,” Sabio said.

Sabio also said he sees nothing wrong with Santos’ having known early which sala would handle the case.

“Being a (GSIS) trustee, Attorney Santos requested me to help. I readily welcomed the request for help and thanked him,” he said.

“There was no mystery about his having known of the results of the raffle because the lawyers are notified thereof and are present thereat,” the PCGG chief said.

“It is his duty to seek assistance for the GSIS where he could legitimately find it. He was right in seeking my assistance,” Sabio said of Santos.

Sabio earlier said he was about to board a plane bound for Manila at the Davao City International Airport on May 30 when he received a call from Santos.

After his conversation with the lawyer, Sabio said he contacted his brother but had to cut short the call because of the noise at the airport. He again called Justice Sabio upon reaching Manila more than an hour later.

Sabio admitted that he was aware of the controversy between the GSIS and Meralco.

“In essence, this was in fact a controversy between the long suffering public and the mighty, financially and politically controlling owners of Meralco,” he said.

“Meralco is not only a public utility but also a monopoly. Fortunately, GSIS had taken up the cudgels for the long suffering public, who are at the mercy of Meralco,” he added.

He said that before he and Justice Sabio ended their conversation, the latter promised to decide according to his conscience.

“With due respect, considering the peculiar circumstances obtaining in this controversy, to perpetually disbar me and to send me to jail for what I have done would be an erroneous application of the laws invoked and would run counter to the heart and soul of our Constitution even though I belong to the executive branch of government,” Sabio told the panel.

He said his having dipped his fingers into a judicial matter has a historical precedent involving himself and the late President Ferdinand Marcos.

He recalled that as a lawyer for two poor farmers in Davao in the 1970s, he was unjustly detained on orders of a judge who was apparently sympathetic to a logging firm. Sabio said Marcos eventually stepped into the issue and ordered his release.

“Like our present Constitution, the 1935 Constitution provided for separation of powers among the three branches of government. In that case, the President had intervened openly in a clearly judicial matter in order to protect two poor farmer-settlers and their counsel and prevent injustice,” he said.

Unfair to FG

Malacañang said it is unfair to drag the name of the First Gentleman into the issue.

“I think that just because of many people’s knowledge that the legal officer is identified with the First Gentleman, they are putting some color into it and it’s also unfair to conclude that the First Gentleman has something to do with it,” Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said.

Ermita said that Santos, as one of the lawyers of the First Gentleman, would know how to protect his client from matters that have nothing to do with him.

“That’s why the issue becomes interesting. I think it’s just an assumption and right now it’s not fair if we will automatically drag the First Gentleman in every action, words that his legal officer may have done just because he is known to be the legal officer,” he added.

“Let the legal processes move forward without us having to say how we are supposed to interfere in the issue that the chairman of PCGG had gotten himself into,” Ermita said.

Ermita recalled that he advised Sabio to explain his involvement in the issue and to find out whether he had some legal matters to address before he left for Brazil last Aug. 14.

Meanwhile, Makati City Mayor and United Opposition president Jejomar Binay said Santos’ call to Sabio was a “clear attempt” to influence the court.

“It is hard to imagine Atty. Jesus Santos acting on his own or even on behalf of the GSIS. He is the First Gentleman’s lawyer and he is not known for doing things without the approval of his principal client,” Binay said.

“It would also appear that the Arroyos have made their quarrel with the Lopezes personal, hence the effort of Mike Arroyo to influence the CA,” he added.

‘Explain!’ Palace told

Senators believe PCGG’s Sabio and Santos have a lot of explaining to do regarding their controversial phone conversation.

The issue even prompted Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago to push for amendments to Republic Act 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act to make indiscreet phone calls punishable under the law.

“At the very least, it was indiscreet. It might be construed as violation of the anti graft and corrupt practices act when one officer tries to influence official transactions that might be, directly or indirectly, ultimately to his advantage,” Santiago told reporters in an interview.

“I would suggest because of this incident that the Anti Graft Act be amended, such that (it will be a) specific crime for any officer to communicate with other officer of the government respecting a transaction,” she added.

Santiago said Santos’ actions may also be considered violations of the Code of Ethics.

“The problem is that although this might be a conclusion that could be drawn from the code of ethics of public officials, it is not specifically outlawed in the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. That is why there is a defense that there is no intent to violate criminal law,” she added.

“It is a gray area, although he has been candid enough to admit the act, he has raised the defense that he has committed no offense.  That is plausible because there is no explicit language in the Anti Graft law, although that is very strongly implied in the Code of Ethics,” Santiago added.

Santiago said however that there’s no reason to involve the President’s husband in the controversy.

“The mere fact that he is in the legal staff of the First Gentleman, if that is true, does not necessarily implicate his boss. He may have acted on his own, or he may have acted for other important people,” Santiago said.

“I do not think that this calls for his resignation from the GSIS Board of Trustees, but it is a warning,” she added.

Sen. Loren Legarda, for her part, batted for transparency.

“For me the case should be dealt with in full transparency and accountability,” she said, adding that “both sides must be investigated and it must be done in full transparency to the public.”

Sen. Richard Gordon, who had crossed swords with the PCGG chairman in the past, said the First Gentleman’s lawyer should be liable for violation of the anti-graft law.

“He’s liable maybe for anti-graft because he talked to a relative of the justice involved in the case,” Gordon said.

Majority leader Francis Pangilinan said Malacañang also has a lot to explain.

“What was the role of Atty. Santos in this issue? What was his motive? Who was he representing?” he asked.

“Given that he is the First Gentleman’s lawyer, it would be best for Malacañang to come forward and explain whether or not Santos was acting on behalf of the President’s husband,” Pangilinan said.

Pangilinan said Sabio should be called to explain his side before any legal proceedings could be made against him.

“The question is not necessarily one of the rights of the parties, but as to whether the lawyer has adhered to proper professional standard,” Pangilinan said.

“A lawyer may be disciplined or suspended for any misconduct, whether in his professional or private capacity as public confidence in law and a lawyer may be eroded by the irresponsible and improper conduct of a member of the bar,” he added.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson urged the CA to prepare possible administrative sanctions against its own member due to the bribery allegations.

Lacson shares the opinion of his colleagues that Santos should be disbarred for violating ethical standards by intervening in the case. With Christina Mendez and Michael Punongbayan